Connect with us

Society

Alleged Certificate Forgery: NYSC Tenders Documents Against Enugu Governor,Peter Mbah Before Election Tribunal

Published

on

The National Youth Service Corps, NYSC, on Friday tendered some documents before the Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Enugu State, indicating that Governor Peter Mbah of Enugu State forged the NYSC discharge certificate he submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), during the 2023 general elections.

NYSC, which was subpoenaed by the tribunal, tendered some documents in evidence on Friday evening when the tribunal resumed hearing in petition, the Labour Party, and its candidate, Chijioke Edeoga filed before it against Mbah’s election.

At the resumed hearing, the LP presented the NYSC, as its first witness.

Among the documents tendered by the NYSC are the alleged forged discharge certificate, as well as the original discharge certificate which Mbah ought to have collected, as well as a letter written by Oma and Partners, an Abuja-based law firm, which had asked the Corps to scrutinise the discharge certificate submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, by the governor.

The petitioners, represented by Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, who is the lead counsel, alongside Dr. Valerie Azinge, SAN, Ifeanyi Ogenyi Esq, and others, led the Petitioners Witness 1 (PW1) in evidence.

The Petitioners Witness 1 is the Director of Certification, NYSC, Aliyu Abdul Mohammed, who adopted his written deposition on oath.

Awomolo sought to tender the witness’s deposition on oath as evidence before the tribunal.

The third respondent, PDP, counsel, Barrister Anthony Ani, SAN, objected to the admissibility of the document and opted to move a motion dated and filed on the 7th day of July 2023, which seeks to pray the tribunal to strike out the written deposition on oath of the PW1 on the ground of incompetence.

The 1st respondent, INEC, as well as the 2nd respondent (Peter Mbah) aligned themselves with the submission of Ani and prayed the court to strike out the written deposition of Mohammed (PW1) for lack of competence.

Relying on the Court of Appeal decision in the case of ANDP & anor V INEC as well as that of Damina & Anor V Adamu and ors, the respondents’ counsels asked the court to strike out the written deposition on oath of the PW1 for lack of competence.

In response the petitioners’ lawyers relying on the case of Ararume & anor V INEC, which according to them, is a conflicting decision with the authorities cited by the respondents’ counsel, asked the court to admit the written deposition on oath of the PW1.

In a short ruling, the tribunal admitted the document and reserved ruling on the objections raised by the respondents for final judgement.

The PW1 was then taken in for examination-in-chief.

Mohammed told the tribunal that he acted on a subpoena served on the Director General of the NYSC or any other official to appear before the tribunal for the purposes of giving evidence in order to clear some issues bothering on the certificate purportedly issued by the agency.

The subpoena was admitted in evidence without objection from the respondents and was marked as exhibit PTC/01/06.

Mohammed also tendered his official identity card as a staff of NYSC which was admitted in evidence and marked as exhibit PTC/01/07.

In paragraph three (3) of the Petitioners’ Witness’s deposition on oath, the witness stated that in obedience to the subpoena by the tribunal, he came with the authentic discharge certificate of the governor, as well as the one purportedly given to him.

The respondents’ counsel objected to the admissibility of the documents and reserved their reasons for final written addresses.

The tribunal admitted the documents and marked them as exhibits PTC/ 01/08 a and b.

The petitioners also fielded another witness, an Abuja-based legal practitioner, Mary Nneoma Elijah, a principal partner in the law firm of Oma and Partners.

She is the Petitioners’ Witness 2.

The petitioners’ counsel sought to tender her written deposition on oath as evidence, which was objected to by the respondents’ counsel, citing the same grounds raised in the first stage.

The court admitted the document and reserved the ruling during judgement.

She also adopted the subpoena of the tribunal dated 21st day of June, 2023, which was admitted and marked as exhibit PTC/01/09.

The witness’s letter to INEC, as well as the reply given by INEC was sought to be tendered by the petitioners’ counsel amid objections from the respondents’ counsel.

However, the letters, as well as the discharged certificate were admitted and marked as exhibits PTC/01/11 a, b & c respectively.

Also, a letter addressed to the presiding justice of the Federal High Court, Lagos Division, for the production of the appointment letter dated 14 July 2003, appointing Barr. Peter Mbah as the Chief of Staff to the then governor of Enugu state, Dr. Chimaroke Nnamani in the same year he (Mbah) claimed he was serving, also admitted in evidence amidst objections and marked as exhibit PTC/01/13 a&b.

During cross examination, the 1st respondent’s counsel, Mr. Abdul Mohammed, applying for the subpoena, asked “confirm to this tribunal that the subpoena did not ask you about anything at the Federal High court”.

In response, PW2 said ” True”. Mr. Abdul Mohammed further asked the PW2: “Confirm to this tribunal that you have given to the petitioners the contents of these letters at the time they were preparing this petition”.

In reply, the PW2 said, “It’s false, the letters are public documents which are in the public domain. Anybody can ask for the letters and they will be given to him.

The matter was adjourned to Tuesday, 11 July, 2023, for further hearing.

Society

Oando Boss, Wale Tinubu Receives Award as Best Investor of the Year

Published

on

By

 

Jubril Adewale Tinubu, oil tycoon and GCE of leading oil and gas firm, OANDO, yesterday shone brilliantly like a well-cut diamond when he received the award for the New Telegraph Investor/Transaction of the Year 2024.

 

The oil guru with three decades of expectational performance in the oil sector was among other prominent Nigerians that went home with honours at the Oriental Hotels, venue of the ceremony.

 

The award, described as well- deserved, was presented to Tinubu for leading his team to successfully completing the acquisition of Agip Oil Company at $783 million.

 

The transaction, which was completed in August 2024, was described my many as a remarkable one the nation’s economy.

 

Tinubu is an intelligent, pragmatic and a genius who strikes when the iron is hottest.

 

Gifted with a knack to spot opportunity ahead of the crowd, Tinubu has in the last 30 years of unbroken entrepreneurial voyage positioned Oando among the best oil and gas company in the world.

He believes Nigeria offers limitless possibilities and opportunities, and holds high, at all times, the banner of hope.

 

Today, the business has not only earned him fame and wealth, but has also contributed in great measures to the economic development of Africa and beyond.

 

Other awardees on the night include Governor Babagana Zulum of Borno State won the Governor of the Year 2024; Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu of Lagos State received the Governor of the Year in Projects, while Governor Ahmed Aliyu of Sokoto State won Governor of the Year in Economy

 

 

Others are Governor Sheriff Oborevwori of Delta State; Osun State Governor, Senator Ademola Adeleke; Ekiti State Governor, Biodun Oyebanji; Group Chief Executive Officer of the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL), Mr Mele Kyari, won the newspaper’s prestigious Man of the Year 2024, while the Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development, Barrister Festus Keyamo (SAN), won Minister of the Year 2024 in Transformative Leadership.

Continue Reading

Society

The weaponization of justice and the injustice faced by Dan Etete – Jeremiah Perekeme 0woupele

Published

on

By

 

In the intricate corridors of global jurisprudence, the scales of justice often tip under the weight of political machinations and economic interests. The case of Dan Etete, Nigeria’s former Minister of Petroleum, epitomizes how legal systems can be manipulated, leading to profound personal and national injustices.

Dan Etete, appointed as Nigeria’s Minister of Petroleum Resources in 1995, played a pivotal role in introducing the marginal oil field regime and indigenous participation in Nigeria’s oil and gas industry. His contributions have however been beclouded by the controversy around the controversial OPL 245. This oil block, one of Africa’s richest, became the focus of a protracted legal battle involving major oil companies amid allegations of corruption. Etete’s involvement led to accusations that have marred his reputation and overshadowed his contributions to Nigeria’s oil sector.

In a landmark decision, an Italian court acquitted Eni, Shell, and associated individuals, including Etete, of corruption charges related to OPL 245. The court concluded that there was no case to answer, highlighting the absence of sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations. This verdict underscores the complexities inherent in international legal proceedings, where accusations often outpace the evidence required for conviction.

Etete’s ordeal is not isolated. Globally, individuals have faced similar legal battles, where accusations are levied, with years spent in court, only to culminate in acquittals. These cases highlight systemic issues within legal frameworks that allow for the weaponization of justice, often driven by political or economic motivations.

The protracted legal saga of Amanda Knox serves as a poignant illustration of Italy’s judicial labyrinth. Knox, an American student, was accused of the 2007 murder of Meredith Kercher in Perugia. After initial convictions and subsequent acquittals, she was finally exonerated by Italy’s Supreme Court in 2015.

The case highlighted significant issues within the Italian legal system. Issues were raised around the handling of forensic evidence, media interference, and prosecutorial conduct. It also underscored the challenges of ensuring justice in a system where legal procedures can be as complex as the crimes themselves.

In the UK, the case of the Birmingham Six remains a stark reminder of the fallibility of justice systems. Six Irish men were wrongfully convicted in 1975 for pub bombings in Birmingham, based on coerced confessions and questionable forensic evidence. After 16 years of imprisonment, their convictions were quashed in 1991, revealing systemic flaws such as investigative misconduct and the suppression of evidence. This case prompted significant reforms in the UK’s criminal justice system, emphasizing the need for checks and balances to prevent miscarriages of justice.

The term “weaponization of justice” refers to the deliberate manipulation of legal systems to achieve objectives beyond the pursuit of truth and fairness. The weaponization of legal technicalities, whether through coerced confessions, mishandled evidence, or political interference, undermines the foundational principles of justice.

In Dan Etete’s case, the prolonged legal battles, despite eventual acquittal, suggest a misuse of judicial processes, leading to reputational damage. Despite his achievements that merit recognition, and most notably his discharge and acquittal in three jurisdictions – ITALY, UNITED KINGDOM, and Nigeria; he has remained the focal point of smear campaigns.

What does his discharge and acquittal really mean? It means that Dan Etete has been formally cleared of charges in a court of law. This means the court has found him not guilty of the charges brought against him. An acquittal signifies that there was insufficient evidence to prove the person committed the alleged offence, or was proven innocent. This means the accused is released from the legal process and is free to go. If he has been found to have done nothing wrong by the Nigerian Legal system, where the judiciary has come under scrutiny in recent times, is it being insinuated that the course of justice was perverted in those other jurisdictions?

In reflecting upon the Chief Dan Etete cases, it becomes evident that the pursuit of justice requires constant vigilance, systemic introspection, and unwavering commitment to fairness. Just as poverty can be weaponized to perpetuate societal inequities, legal ambiguities when exploited, lead to miscarriages of justice.

Moreover, they erode public trust in legal institutions, deter individuals from public service, and can have economic repercussions, especially in sectors as vital as oil and gas. Furthermore, they highlight the need for reforms to prevent the misuse of legal systems and to ensure that justice is truly blind.

Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs) often find themselves under intense scrutiny due to their influential positions, making them susceptible to allegations of corruption. In several instances, PEPs have been wrongfully accused and, despite subsequent exoneration, have suffered significant reputational damage due to smear campaigns. Here are five notable cases from different countries:

Former President John Dramani Mahama was implicated in a bribery scandal involving Airbus SE, with allegations suggesting his involvement through his brother, Samuel Adam Mahama. These claims, lacking substantial evidence, were perceived as politically motivated to tarnish Mahama’s reputation and divert attention from governmental shortcomings. The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) eventually exonerated Mahama, but the smear campaign had already inflicted damage on his public image.

Adolphus Wabara, former President of the Nigerian Senate, faced allegations in 2005 of accepting a ₦55 million bribe to influence budget approvals. Despite his resignation and a prolonged 14-year legal battle, Wabara was acquitted in 2019 due to insufficient evidence.

Frederick Chiluba, Zambia’s second President, faced allegations of embezzling public funds after his tenure ended in 2002. Following a protracted legal process, Chiluba was acquitted of all charges in 2009. The court determined that the prosecution failed to provide compelling evidence linking him to the alleged crimes. This verdict underscored the challenges in distinguishing between political vendettas and genuine anti-corruption efforts.

Georgia Thompson, a Wisconsin state employee, was convicted in 2006 on federal corruption charges, accused of steering a state contract for political reasons. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit overturned her conviction in 2007, citing a lack of evidence.

Former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia was accused of misusing funds related to the Zia Charitable Trust, leading to her conviction and imprisonment in 2018. In November 2024, the Supreme Court of Bangladesh acquitted Zia and all co-accused, citing a lack of credible evidence.

Nabil Sayadi, director of the European branch of the Global Relief Foundation, was accused of transferring funds to an Al-Qaeda financier, leading to his inclusion on international watch-lists and the freezing of his assets. In 2006, Belgian judges exonerated Sayadi, citing a lack of evidence linking him to terrorist activities.

These cases highlight the profound impact that unfounded corruption allegations and smear campaigns can have on PEPs, often resulting in lasting reputational harm even after legal exoneration.While many accusations are substantiated, there are notable instances where PEPs have been wrongfully accused and subsequently exonerated by the legal system.

Chief Dan Etete’s experience, like the ones already referenced, serves as a stark reminder of the potential for justice systems to be weaponized. It calls for introspection and reform to safeguard the principles of fairness and equity, ensuring that individuals are protected from undue legal persecutions driven by interests that have little to do with justice. This underscores the necessity for robust legal frameworks that ensure due process, protect individuals from politically motivated accusations, and uphold the integrity of judicial systems worldwide.

*** Jeremiah Perekeme Owoupele is a Niger Delta based lawyer.

Continue Reading

Society

Portable now in our custody – Ogun Police

Published

on

By

 

The Ogun State Police Command says Habeeb Okikiola, aka Portable, is now in its custody.

 

Omolola Odutola, the state public relations officer made the disclosure in a statement on Wednesday.

 

According to her, “The Ogun State Police Command wishes to inform the public that Habeeb Okikiola, also known as Portable, arrived at the State Criminal Investigation Department, Eleweran, Abeokuta, at exactly 13:23 hours today, February 19, 2025.

 

 

“His presence at the SCID is connected to an ongoing investigation. The command assures the public that due process will be followed in handling this matter, and updates will be provided as necessary.”

 

Portable was declared wanted for assault on some officials of the Ogun State Town Planning Agency who were carrying out enforcement on his property in the Ilogbo area of the state.

 

Details later…

Continue Reading

Trending